Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

theo5789

Members
  • Posts

    10,599
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

Everything posted by theo5789

  1. Say Marky and Tanev come in at around 11 million. Minus the bonus overage leaves about 4.5 million left. I imagine we buyout Baertschi. Even then, we may have to make a small move to sign the rest of those guys and fill in whatever spots left in the lineup. IMO, Toffoli is only signed if we can move out some of the big contracts (which I think is unlikely). An alternative is we trade Boeser for a top 4 RD at roughly the same cost of less, but in the end it's at wing where it's going to take the hit and we have the youth there to hopefully up the odds of replacement one or the other. Optimistically, I hope we get Marky signed to 5.5 million for 6 years (likely with no movement clause), Tanev at 4.5 for 4 years (less term would be better, but would also bump up the dollar amount then) and thus only 10 million committed to the two, so an extra million to work with. If we do sign Toffoli, I'm hoping it's closer to 5 million rather than 6, which would simply be unaffordable for us IMO. Even at 5 million, we would have to move out Baertschi, Sutter and Roussel (Eriksson will be tough to move) to get it done I would think. In other words, it's not going to be easy. I would try to move Sutter and Roussel with some retention (hopefully not 50%) as that likely doesn't cost us any major assets. I could see a situation where Sutter and Ferland potentially on the IR, which may open up some room, but it makes things more complicated.
  2. 1 Markstrom 2 Tanev 3 JV Who are the young guys that have earned a shot? I don't disagree that we should bring in some youth, but who replaces Tanev effectively? The young guys that should have a shot are wingers and while there are a couple of RD options, it is hard to replace Tanev's role. Worrying about a 6x6 deal for him is futile IMO. There is not even a rumour that he's looking for that much. I suspect more along 4.5-5 for 4 years.
  3. Most of the talk has been covered, but I just want to point out that we aren't "saving" cap by letting Leivo and Stecher go. They are not in the cap equation for next season as of right now anyway. Capfriendly has us at just over 17 million in cap space next season to sign whoever we want to sign or not. Technically we wouldn't be saving cap on Virtanen either, but it is likely that we are signing him with a raise too. So in your original proposal, all we would "save" is Sutter's cap for next season. If we can move out Eriksson using Demko, then we have to replace Demko. Even if we can get a cheap backup, all we would "save" there is the 6 million. So is it worth moving Jake and Demko (+whatever else needed) to save about 10 million in cap space? Potentially, but I think that "whatever else" we need to add will be significant.
  4. The tweet never mentioned anything about the reason being to protect children from hearing it. I'm sure it's more to do with protecting their image and not having any PR nightmares. While I agree with you that derogatory terms should not be allowed at any time, it could happen in the spur of the moment and the NHL likely rather deal with it in house than to have a public debate over it on social media, especially with how sensitive things are lately. Surely there are some of us that can tolerate it, but there are many that cannot and having a 5 second delay to cover up some colourful remarks isn't going to take away from viewing the actual hockey itself. I think the fake crowd noise may be weird as it likely won't match the action. I wonder if the crowd noise will also be played in the building for the players.
  5. Would you even notice a 5 second delay? I'm sure they'll match the commentary in time with it and thus watching at home, you'll see no different. Unless you plan on listening to a radio broadcast while watching TV, it shouldn't matter. It's not just swear words, it's derogatory terms or other comments that are said in the heat of the moment that could get blown out of proportion. It could tarnish a player's image in today's sensitive world and become a social media nightmare on the league. Normally what's said on the ice stays on the ice and they are simply keeping it that way. They want to give us the sounds of the ice and action still while managing their image. I guess I'd have to see how they do the fake crowd noise if they choose that route. I can't really say it sucks or not until I hear it.
  6. Thanks for a thought out response. Too often when I ask these questions, the posters either disappear from the thread or do not have much rationale behind it. I only ask because you have a statement that we should walk away from Tanev because of what we gave Myers which didn't see to have any ifs, but rather a must. Now I get that a lot needs to be played out before any assessment can be fully made. There are many scenarios that can play out and still work (or not). So the way I see it is playoffs or not, we want to improve on the team (even if we win the Cup). IMO, losing our top, most reliable defensive dman, one who has chemistry with Hughes (think Methot to Karlsson for example) and is well respected in the room especially amongst the young new core is going to be a big hole to fill. We don't have anyone in the pipeline that is going to jump into this role or at least it's a very big longshot. This is a massive gamble that could set us back and we become closer to the Toronto model if we are shifting our cap towards an offensive style system (it's entertaining, but proven to be quite ineffective in the long run). Tanev is a guy that wants to be here, has made a comment about willing to take a one year deal (even if it's been retracted by presumably his agent, the fact that he said it shows how much he values being here). He's within the top 2 or 3 available RD UFAs, so it's not like he's chopped liver. He could pursue the big bucks elsewhere, but he wants to be here (I believe he has a real home here). We signed so many vets to insulate the youth. We probably did advance a lot faster than expected, but that doesn't mean you leave a major hole in your lineup. The reason I'm comfortable with Toffoli leaving is because we have potentially Virtanen that can step up, MacEwen could get a look, Podkolzin coming mid-season, Lind having an uptick year, Hoglander making the jump here, and even a Roussel has stepped up in a top 6 role before. The odds of finding a suitable replacement are much higher than banking on a Rafferty who's offense looks good but the hole is defense where he's still in question and Woo who hasn't seen a single pro game and no one has suggested that he could make that jump right away because he's still raw. So I fully agree with prioritizing the cap, but I'm looking at what we do have in the system to increase the odds of remaining competitive. I'd be hard pressed to believe any team would've been able to plan for a pandemic and without a flat cap, we wouldn't be in that much of a predicament. But I still don't believe that because of Myers that we lose Tanev. It would take some major reason like a major injury, crazy wife, etc. In terms of play, I put him at a high priority at this moment.
  7. Because Hughes had been tested in the world championships against men, he had his 5 game stint the year prior to assess him. We still had signed Benn and Fantenberg for LD depth and Edler was still around to take on the hard assignments. Hughes was taking on an offensive role and could be sheltered more especially being partnered with some like Tanev who is a defensive stalwart. By losing Tanev, you're losing your top PK defender and a guy that often had to face the toughest competition (although that shifted towards Myers and Edler 5v5 last season). You can give a youngster a shot (if he has earned it), but it's a big hole to fill. Hughes replaced Hutton/Del Zotto. Not exactly the same loss as a Tanev. Not sure why that's so hard to figure out although maybe the concept is a bit too complex for those that can't see it. I also hope you understand that if it doesn't work out, then that means we would likely be dropping games and other teams won't be lining up to help us out. That means we would be trading from a position of weakness to pay for a position of weakness that we created on our own when we have a player that we could sign for free and is a known to us. Seems like an unnecessary gamble when we have higher quality players to fill in for a Toffoli to save cap instead.
  8. But that doesn't answer why paying Myers 6 million means we have to move on from Tanev. There are often proposals for deals, but often it's lopsided in our favour. Many are uptight at the thought of moving Boeser if you want a significant piece to fill that top 4 RD, and the sum of whatever parts will likely not net you much better than a Tanev unless you're willing to part with another 1st or significant prospect which people are also uptight about. I'm fine with going with a younger roster, but not in a position that plays some of the hardest minutes on the team. This is why I'm comfortable with moving on from Toffoli assuming we can afford to retain him because you can slot in youth as we have depth there to up the odds of finding a replacement and also have them in a position (wing) that doesn't expose us as much. Much like center being a tough position to fill, we are lucky to have someone like Bo that can take the brunt of it and have a lot of support from Miller on wing capable of taking draws and Beagle and Sutter have taken many of those hard minutes to allow EP and Gaudette to hone their craft.
  9. Without a signature Gaudette celly, I'm going to give that goal to OJ
  10. Artemi Panarin +36 last season almost matching Tanev's career number, defensive specialist forward. So good defensively that he averaged a whole second of PK ice time per game this past season!
  11. Care to explain why? Say Tanev comes in around 5 million, 11 million for two top 4 RD isn't unreasonable. Hell the Sharks paid 11.5 for one player. We didn't sign Myers to replace Tanev, we signed Myers because we really needed another top 4 RHD. Losing Tanev takes us back. There's no one on the UFA market that's going to be as good at a cheaper cost and a trade isn't going to be cheap. Relying on youth to step in and take on one of hardest defensive roles of the team is a big gamble.
  12. Funny how certain players need to be the perfect specimens to have any value when in reality almost every player could be nitpicked into not excelling in certain areas of their game. Like Hughes and physical play or EP and his faceoffs for a centerman, but they get a pass because they aren't a player they like and they provide the "sexy" offense. Actual (smart) defense is so underrated and they want to build the team with the current Toronto model, yet also make fun of them for their lack of defense (or so I think, unless they are closet Leafs fans).
  13. How many Quinn's are there that can do so? I'm all for giving them a chance, but you don't purposely leave a gaping hole in hopes they fill it because what if they aren't ready? We haven't rushed any prospects and gave everyone competition to earn their role, that won't change and has been effective thus far. And like I said, we only have Rafferty and Woo who are the RD prospects (Chatfield as well if you want to include him) and I explained that one has been questioned defensively (where the big hole that Tanev would leave) and the other has always been called a longer term project and won't get any experience with the big club until the next training camp (unlike Hughes who got an early look for assessment). I'd argue that now without Tryamkin, Tanev bumps up to the top priority, or at least on par with Marky. Toffoli remains on the bottom of my priority list of the three. We have much more (and better) internal competition for Toffoli's spot if we want to go with a cheaper option and it's a position that doesn't get as exposed as easily if they falter. I would love to be able to fit Toffoli, but he's a luxury piece if we can.
  14. When we signed Myers, Benning mentioned the importance of finding another top 4 RD. Losing Tanev takes us a step back, unless we have a formidable replacement. You listed 2 LD that likely don't impact the RD side of things unless they play their off side and you've listed a player who's been questioned of his defense and a player who hasn't seen a pro game yet. They are "options", but none that strikes any confidence. So yes they are low cap hits and needing experience, but you don't do that in a top 4 role, not if you expect to win that is.
  15. They were a fine pairing, but they didn't have the support of someone like Hughes on the 2nd pairing. Hughes is a game changer for us and partnered with Tanev gives us a more legit top 4 that we didn't have then (although I still think Edler and Myers have worked well together and should remain a pair).
  16. I think his agent is trying to get things back on track. Tanev himself would probably take a one year deal, but his agent would hate that idea and thus backtracked it. Tanev clearly cares about the team. If he is true to his word about market value though, then the UFA market is going to take a hit with covid and the flat cap, so I'm fine with giving him the term at the lower rate. If he wants any trade/expansion protection, he's going to have to add a further discount.
  17. And we were far worse when Tanev was out. Was last year an anomaly or has Hughes' presence allowed for Tanev to stay healthy by having a partner that can relieve pressure with control? He had redesigned gear to help his PK duties. Hughes has praised Tanev every time and all of the young players look up to him and respect him. Markstrom is a must, I agree. Toffoli is only if we can afford to fit him in. We have far more internal depth to bump the odds of being able to replace a Toffoli than we do with Tanev.
  18. So you're telling me a guy that just got brought up to the main group for the first time facing one of the best shifters in the NHL should have masterfully played him? It wasn't perfect for sure, but like I said, it was a good test for his knees and he kept up for the most part. Even some of the best dmen in the NHL don't always prevent scoring chances from happening. With that said, if a player gets open in the slot, then another player had poor coverage, seems silly to blame that on a sole dman that could've been put in a 2 on 1 situation down low.
  19. You have other players on your team that are suppose to cover the passes, his job is to keep his man in which he did for the most part with one of the "shiftiest" players in the game. OJ has to try and do it without taking a penalty.
  20. Yeah that's my biggest concern for next season is that we will likely have to graduate someone, but we have to be able to depend on them. I think Brisebois is the safest bet, but Rathbone has a higher ceiling. Juolevi is there too, but I think could use a bit more ice time in Utica. Rafferty IMO is probably the one that worries me the most. Not that I think he's a bad player, but I think he wouldn't fill in to help keep Tanev from playing bigger minutes. He does have the size, but his defensive game is going to be troublesome for trust unless he kicks it up a notch. The problem is all of the players that are close are mostly LD, so losing Stecher does hurt in that regard, so hopefully he does sign for cheap. Benn can play RD though, but he's had a tough year and might only be worse being paired with a rookie. Although I hope he simplifies his game to one like Luke Schenn did.
  21. So if he excels here, then he's going to have to stay in that bubble for the rest of his career.
  22. Damn, facing Hughes as shifty as he is is a real test on OJs knees. Good on OJ for keeping up for the most part.
×
×
  • Create New...